Milford planning board unanimously approves ballot language for downtown overlay amendment

The Milford Planning Board voted unanimously on Jan. 22, 2026, to place Amendment No. 4 — a proposed Downtown Overlay District — on the town ballot, approving both the ballot language and the topical explanatory language after a public hearing and minor wording edits.

The amendment would create a 97-acre downtown overlay district that preserves ground-floor commercial uses while allowing higher residential density through a conditional-use permit (CUP) process that can award density bonuses for pedestrian improvements, parking, setbacks, workforce housing and architectural design. The ballot language was edited to replace technical phrasing about the "underlying zoning" with clearer wording that refers to the town's current ordinance limiting density to 5 units per acre.

Board Chair Doug Knott opened the special hearing and read a letter from Mark Fougere of 253 Jenison Road urging support. "Multifamily housing in Milford's downtown area has, for years, provided homes for many residents in a walkable, safe neighborhood close to many services," the letter read, arguing such housing "has also provided the town with positive tax dollars."

Several members of the public questioned how the draft calculates and applies density. "Is there a reason why it doesn't just say the current limit is 5 units per acre?" asked Chris Labonte during public comment, pressing the board to simplify the ballot wording so voters can easily understand the change. Resident Scott Kimball of Whitten Road warned the proposal could "really corporatize the downtown" by enabling large multiunit buildings and asked what standards would control building form and historic character.

Town planning staff and board members said architectural and design criteria would remain part of the CUP review. Kyle (the town planner) explained the economic rationale in general terms: "Adding density where existing infrastructure is is a net positive in terms of cost of those services," he said, noting that new development on existing utility lines can avoid the costs of installing new infrastructure. Residents pressed back, noting some large downtown properties (Mill Apartments, Granite Square) are under tax pilot arrangements and therefore skew average-density and revenue calculations.

The topical language read into the record says existing residential and mixed-use parcels in the proposed district average 12.5 units per acre, describes bonus density options and limits bonus density to up to 35 units per acre; the topical also refers to higher-density examples in the downtown (for example, a 207-unit building in Union Square cited in materials at an extreme of 114 units per acre). Mike Thornton of North River Road asked the board to publish the scoring table and weighting used in the density-bonus formula so the public can see how points would be awarded.

After discussion and minor edits — including swapping "underlying" for clearer phrasing and removing a couple of extra words to simplify voter-facing text — Board member Peter Basteelier moved to approve the ballot language as amended; the motion was seconded by Tina Filbrick and passed unanimously. Later, the board approved the topical (explanatory) language by a unanimous voice vote. The board then adjourned.

The amendment will appear on the warrant ballot as Amendment No. 4 with the approved ballot text and topical explanation; the planning board also recorded that it supports Amendment No. 4 by unanimous vote as part of the hearing record.

What’s next: If voters approve the warrant article at the ballot, the overlay district would allow developers and property owners to seek increased density within the designated downtown area through the CUP process; the board did not take any additional implementation steps at this meeting.